- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot ( talk) 11:32, 17 February 2018 [1].
- Nominator(s): SchroCat ( talk) 09:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Yvonne Fletcher was a bright and popular young police officer who was shot in the back by a gunman firing from a first-floor window of the Libyan embassy in London. It marked the start of an eleven-day siege, six Britons being held hostage in Tripoli for nine months and a break in diplomatic relations between the UK and Libya that lasted until 1999. The police investigation has never closed, and they have strong suspicions on the identify of the gunmen and the co-conspirators, some of their evidence can not be released in court because of national security. It's a shabby story for Fletcher's family, who have never been able to see Yvonne's killer brought to justice. This article has been over-hauled recently and gone through a very useful PR. Any further comments are most gratefully received. – SchroCat ( talk) 09:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria ( talk) 14:16, 16 January 2018 (UTC)#
- Thanks for your help and advice at PR on this Nikkimaria. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 09:47, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Support. My few, minor, comments were attended to during the peer review, and I have no additional ones this time round. A well-balanced article, clear, evidently comprehensive, thoroughly sourced and well illustrated. Meets all the FA criteria, in my view. Tim riley talk 20:57, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your thoughts at PR, Tim, and your further comment here - much appreciated. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 09:47, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Support All of my issues were addressed at PR. Eddie891 Talk Work 16:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Eddie891 - your early assistance at the review was very welcome and helpful. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 13:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Support Excellent article, the only thing I might query is the conversion to 1.588 m, I doubt that here height was accurate to within 1 mm Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
- Very true - I've tweaked accordingly. Many thanks for your comment. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 13:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Just a few things. I recall the incident though there was perhaps not as much coverage in the US.
- "to police a" you use police as a noun in the previous section. I might use a synonym here.
- You use the term "deport" in the lede. Is this the proper term given the diplomatic status I imagine they had? Our article on diplomatic immunity suggests "expelled" might be better.
- I might link "telex".
- Consider mentioning that you are quoting from the postmortem prior to the quote, it may read a bit better.
- "the siege in Tripoli was lifted that day and one of the men arrested the previous day was also released.[40][37] " refs in wrong order.
- "a spent cartridge and gunshot residue were found at two windows on the first floor." a total of one or two cartridges?
- "inquiries.[56] When it reconvened, police reported that they had 400 lines of enquiry" no doubt it's a BritEng thing to have both "inquiries" and "enquiry", but I thought I would point it out just in case.
- Your quotation from Robin Cook seems mostly to duplicate what was said in the paragraph before.
- That's it. Looking forward to supporting.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 23:58, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Wehwalt. All addressed in this series of edits. If there are any other thoughts, I'd be happy to address them. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 08:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support Well done.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 16:13, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks, Wehwalt - much obliged. Cheers. - SchroCat ( talk) 16:20, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
In the "Websites and television" section, the publisher of the Hudson source is missing. Otherwise, everything checks out; sources are of the appropriate quality and reliability and are consistently formatted. Brianboulton ( talk) 19:40, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Brian – now added. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 21:05, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support per peer review and subsequent amendments.
Brianboulton (
talk)
17:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Brian - your efforts are always much appreciated. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 17:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
- Excellent article. Would you consider whether the title is appropriate? You and I know she was murdered but there were never any trials or convictions of the killing. Is Killing of Yvonne Fletcher or Killing of PC Yvonne Fletcher worthwhile to consider? Vanguard10 ( talk) 07:29, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think a conviction is needed to decide if someone is murdered, if the circumstances are clear (i.e. there is no thought in this case of suicide or accidental death or causes unknown). The reliable sources all use the term (admittedly among others too). I see other related subjects use a variety of terms, either after the 'best-known-for' event name ( Shepherd's Bush murders, Harrods bombing, etc) or 'death/murder' of: Death of Keith Blakelock, Murder of Stephen Oake, Death of Raja Ahmed, Murder of Sharon Beshenivsky, Death of Jack Avery, Murder of Brian Bishop, Murder of Raymond Codling, Murder of Jonathan Henry, Murders of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone, etc. These were all on the Category:British police officers killed in the line of duty page and I've not gone through all of them. "Murder of" seems to hold a slight majority there, for what it's worth. I'm open to changes, but I'm not sure of the benefit of it here: it wouldn't make it consistent with other similar articles, it's as correct as the main alternative, and it's reflected in the sources. On the grounds of 'if it ain't broke...', I'm inclined to leave it where it is, but if others think otherwise, then we can review further. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 08:55, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Though in most cases like this I would say that "homicide" is more accurate than murder, in this case the suspect was actually arrested for "conspiracy to murder"
the Guardian - there is always a chance that defense counsel could attempt to have the charge reduced to manslaughter, possibly through a plea agreement, but that is only hypothetical, and none of the sources indicate that it was a major issue in this case, which was dropped for entirely unrelated reasons.
Seraphim System (
talk)
13:25, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Since I'm the one that brought it up, I will comment that I believe there has been reasonable discussion about the title. I do not believe that the title merits any delay of FA approval of this fine article. It is better than the average FA, in my opinion.
Vanguard10 (
talk)
03:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for your thoughts Vanguard10 (both here and on my tp). Both threads were very useful and make me look at the article from a different angle. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 16:00, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Since I'm the one that brought it up, I will comment that I believe there has been reasonable discussion about the title. I do not believe that the title merits any delay of FA approval of this fine article. It is better than the average FA, in my opinion.
Vanguard10 (
talk)
03:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- Though in most cases like this I would say that "homicide" is more accurate than murder, in this case the suspect was actually arrested for "conspiracy to murder"
the Guardian - there is always a chance that defense counsel could attempt to have the charge reduced to manslaughter, possibly through a plea agreement, but that is only hypothetical, and none of the sources indicate that it was a major issue in this case, which was dropped for entirely unrelated reasons.
Seraphim System (
talk)
13:25, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Came her as an uninvolved party in editing of this article. I have reviewed it over a day or so. And I find it to be an good and comprehensive article. Even excellent is a word I would use. BabbaQ ( talk) 09:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you BabbaQ, that's very good of you to say. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 16:00, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
A few duplinks you could look at rationalising -- the ones around MI5 highlight that we effectively introduce the agency twice, so the second mention could be trimmed I think. Won't hold up promotion though. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Ian. I'll look into that shortly. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 13:14, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{ featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose ( talk) 11:32, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot ( talk) 11:32, 17 February 2018 [1].
- Nominator(s): SchroCat ( talk) 09:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Yvonne Fletcher was a bright and popular young police officer who was shot in the back by a gunman firing from a first-floor window of the Libyan embassy in London. It marked the start of an eleven-day siege, six Britons being held hostage in Tripoli for nine months and a break in diplomatic relations between the UK and Libya that lasted until 1999. The police investigation has never closed, and they have strong suspicions on the identify of the gunmen and the co-conspirators, some of their evidence can not be released in court because of national security. It's a shabby story for Fletcher's family, who have never been able to see Yvonne's killer brought to justice. This article has been over-hauled recently and gone through a very useful PR. Any further comments are most gratefully received. – SchroCat ( talk) 09:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria ( talk) 14:16, 16 January 2018 (UTC)#
- Thanks for your help and advice at PR on this Nikkimaria. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 09:47, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Support. My few, minor, comments were attended to during the peer review, and I have no additional ones this time round. A well-balanced article, clear, evidently comprehensive, thoroughly sourced and well illustrated. Meets all the FA criteria, in my view. Tim riley talk 20:57, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your thoughts at PR, Tim, and your further comment here - much appreciated. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 09:47, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Support All of my issues were addressed at PR. Eddie891 Talk Work 16:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Eddie891 - your early assistance at the review was very welcome and helpful. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 13:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Support Excellent article, the only thing I might query is the conversion to 1.588 m, I doubt that here height was accurate to within 1 mm Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:51, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
- Very true - I've tweaked accordingly. Many thanks for your comment. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 13:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Just a few things. I recall the incident though there was perhaps not as much coverage in the US.
- "to police a" you use police as a noun in the previous section. I might use a synonym here.
- You use the term "deport" in the lede. Is this the proper term given the diplomatic status I imagine they had? Our article on diplomatic immunity suggests "expelled" might be better.
- I might link "telex".
- Consider mentioning that you are quoting from the postmortem prior to the quote, it may read a bit better.
- "the siege in Tripoli was lifted that day and one of the men arrested the previous day was also released.[40][37] " refs in wrong order.
- "a spent cartridge and gunshot residue were found at two windows on the first floor." a total of one or two cartridges?
- "inquiries.[56] When it reconvened, police reported that they had 400 lines of enquiry" no doubt it's a BritEng thing to have both "inquiries" and "enquiry", but I thought I would point it out just in case.
- Your quotation from Robin Cook seems mostly to duplicate what was said in the paragraph before.
- That's it. Looking forward to supporting.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 23:58, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Wehwalt. All addressed in this series of edits. If there are any other thoughts, I'd be happy to address them. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 08:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support Well done.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 16:13, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks, Wehwalt - much obliged. Cheers. - SchroCat ( talk) 16:20, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
In the "Websites and television" section, the publisher of the Hudson source is missing. Otherwise, everything checks out; sources are of the appropriate quality and reliability and are consistently formatted. Brianboulton ( talk) 19:40, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Brian – now added. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 21:05, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support per peer review and subsequent amendments.
Brianboulton (
talk)
17:00, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
- Many thanks Brian - your efforts are always much appreciated. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 17:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
- Excellent article. Would you consider whether the title is appropriate? You and I know she was murdered but there were never any trials or convictions of the killing. Is Killing of Yvonne Fletcher or Killing of PC Yvonne Fletcher worthwhile to consider? Vanguard10 ( talk) 07:29, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think a conviction is needed to decide if someone is murdered, if the circumstances are clear (i.e. there is no thought in this case of suicide or accidental death or causes unknown). The reliable sources all use the term (admittedly among others too). I see other related subjects use a variety of terms, either after the 'best-known-for' event name ( Shepherd's Bush murders, Harrods bombing, etc) or 'death/murder' of: Death of Keith Blakelock, Murder of Stephen Oake, Death of Raja Ahmed, Murder of Sharon Beshenivsky, Death of Jack Avery, Murder of Brian Bishop, Murder of Raymond Codling, Murder of Jonathan Henry, Murders of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone, etc. These were all on the Category:British police officers killed in the line of duty page and I've not gone through all of them. "Murder of" seems to hold a slight majority there, for what it's worth. I'm open to changes, but I'm not sure of the benefit of it here: it wouldn't make it consistent with other similar articles, it's as correct as the main alternative, and it's reflected in the sources. On the grounds of 'if it ain't broke...', I'm inclined to leave it where it is, but if others think otherwise, then we can review further. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 08:55, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Though in most cases like this I would say that "homicide" is more accurate than murder, in this case the suspect was actually arrested for "conspiracy to murder"
the Guardian - there is always a chance that defense counsel could attempt to have the charge reduced to manslaughter, possibly through a plea agreement, but that is only hypothetical, and none of the sources indicate that it was a major issue in this case, which was dropped for entirely unrelated reasons.
Seraphim System (
talk)
13:25, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Since I'm the one that brought it up, I will comment that I believe there has been reasonable discussion about the title. I do not believe that the title merits any delay of FA approval of this fine article. It is better than the average FA, in my opinion.
Vanguard10 (
talk)
03:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for your thoughts Vanguard10 (both here and on my tp). Both threads were very useful and make me look at the article from a different angle. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 16:00, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Since I'm the one that brought it up, I will comment that I believe there has been reasonable discussion about the title. I do not believe that the title merits any delay of FA approval of this fine article. It is better than the average FA, in my opinion.
Vanguard10 (
talk)
03:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- Though in most cases like this I would say that "homicide" is more accurate than murder, in this case the suspect was actually arrested for "conspiracy to murder"
the Guardian - there is always a chance that defense counsel could attempt to have the charge reduced to manslaughter, possibly through a plea agreement, but that is only hypothetical, and none of the sources indicate that it was a major issue in this case, which was dropped for entirely unrelated reasons.
Seraphim System (
talk)
13:25, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support - Came her as an uninvolved party in editing of this article. I have reviewed it over a day or so. And I find it to be an good and comprehensive article. Even excellent is a word I would use. BabbaQ ( talk) 09:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you BabbaQ, that's very good of you to say. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 16:00, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
A few duplinks you could look at rationalising -- the ones around MI5 highlight that we effectively introduce the agency twice, so the second mention could be trimmed I think. Won't hold up promotion though. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Ian. I'll look into that shortly. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 13:14, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{ featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose ( talk) 11:32, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.